stanford trying to pull the shocker and green and fields have scored more than half of the points. >> marques: these guys have been one of the most potent combination in college basketball. landry fields, not a huge game for him. averaging 22 points a game. jeremy green, defensively i thought really cannot focus, playing great, anticipating steals, contesting shots. >> steve: pacific life pac-10 tournament, ucla will face california in the first semifinal game tomorrow at 6:00. then tomorrow at 8:30, who will it be? stanford and alex kiesow support before the game the stanford coaches told me that the main

offensivoal is patience. that patience has turned into a full-blown confidence down here on the bench. stanford is looking like a team with a whole lot of swagger right now but johnny dawkins is still keeping things very serious. he said he wants the team to finish strong. >> steve: they also have their best foul shooters on the floor and with a 35 second clock i would imagine we'll see shiller handle the ball a lot. he gets fouled. and 91% foul shooter at the free-throw line. >> marques: 3:22 left, way too much time. you've got to be aggressive and smart on your defense, defensive approach against drew shiller. you don't want to stick these guys at the line. you're down 13, can you get a stop here and get to a ten point game? you get it below ten, psychologically stanford starts to press a little bit. way too much time to get into the foul game. >> steve: the pride of burlingame, california, drops in

a pair. stanford up 15 with 3:22 to go. kuksiks back in. scored 15 in the first half, has not scored in the second half. glasser tied up by landry. kuksiks trying to slash in. can't bank it in. that rebound goes to the cardinal. >> marques: tough effort by the cardinal. rihards kuksiks. >> steve: this will be without a doubt the cardinal's biggest win of the year. they knocked off virginia earlier this year. shipp misses from the corner. knocked off usc in washington state but this would be the biggest. that's a career high with 12 points. >> marques: kind of one of those shots, johnny dawkins says pull it out. >> steve: glasser with a basket and a

been a ible career. four year starter, a guy who walked on at usc, then he got the scholarship with kevin kruger for arizona state, left to joined his father at unlv, opening a spot for that man, and he has had quite a career. most assists in arizona state history. 544. >> marques: surpassing the late bobby thompson, a former walk on, over a thousand career points. only player in school history to a couple that feet. 1,000 points, 500 assists. derek glasser said before this game, if we lose this game, if we have no shot at the ncaa tournament, his teammates and arizona state fans hope that he is not prophetic. >> steve: scott perrott, the assistant coach, has been his assistant the last eight years.

he also coached james harden and came to arizona state a little early, and now he is the lead recruiter for arizona state and they've got some good players coming in next year including kinde, a star at modern day, and percy hawkins son corey coming in, a fine player from the phoenix area. a 7'2" center from canada. they got a verbal on a point guard, 6'3" junior college player branded dunstan from wabash junior college. >> marques: hawkins broke the high school scoring record. another pretty good player. you have an idea how devastating a shooter hawkins is. he's had some 40-50 point games. >> steve: he had 65 in the record setting game that broke bibby's mark. glasser a shot. they close it to 12 with 2:17 left. do they have one more run in

them? our play of the game, the landry fields drive. >> marques: stanford renamed all business like. businesslike on this. off the dribble, get three right there, and then off

another player, they'll talk about this as an opportunity to pull off the unexpected, pull off the upset. that's out stanford approached this game. >> steve: jeremy green led them tonight in a fine game, hitting some big shots outside while so much attention was paid to his teammate, landry fields. then this defensive play. it was a big moment in the contest which through the momentum back to the cardinal. >> marques: broken record back in the old days, but defensively, jeremy green and this entire stanford team, always think of arizona state, as well as they've played,

physically defensively this year, as kind of setting the tone defensively. it's been stanford it tonight's game that set the tone. >> steve: abbott this his three. stanford gets the basketball. igbinosa buckhead. can't buy abbott. and trotter wants to move it back out and kill time. timeout, stanford. >> marques: johnny dawkins right on top of the play after the block made. right in his ear, signaled for the timeout. timing, igbinosa took a floater. i thought he should have pulled out. you do have an advantage going down the floor but right now the clock is what you need to be concerned with, not scoring more points and trying to increase the lead. >> steve: as we take a look at the pacific glass pac-10 tourney brackets, ucla behind reeves nelson double-double knock off arizona 75-69.

corey -- oregon beat california for the first five minutes and took over. randall went crazy. scored all 22 points in the first half and number one seed california easily knocked off the docks. inside of two minutes to play and stanford with a 65-52 lead >> marques: nice job of handling the double-team by jack trotter. playing against the clock. you pass on those, milk the clock and move it around. there's shiller stepping out of bounds. >> steve: turnover goes asu's way. that's the 13th turnover by the carnal but the real story has been the turnovers by arizona state that have resulted in 25 points. glasser goes down the middle and scores to make it an 11 point game with 1:28 left.

>> marques: you see strange things in this game of basketball and i like that he's battling all the way. >> steve: let's take a look at the first team pac-10. jerome randle, pac-10 player of the year. >> marques: now senior, teammate patrick christopher really did a good job with defensive rebounding. fields with two points, their leading scorer. there's our freshman of the year in derek williams and your guy, nic wise, frankincense and myrrh. tie abbott, arizona state. highlight the selection. michael roll solid this season. isiah thomas, we kind of forget about isaiah. quincy pondexter, isiah thomas stepped up big tonight down the stretch. quincy pondexter, we will see in the next game, he feels like he may have been slighted in the pac-10 player of the year voting to randle.

>> he's played very well lately, a brilliant game with 34 points the other night. >> marques: five times pac-10 conference player of the week and that's his point. you know jerome randle. he's the regular-season conference champion, but washington we got a its last year. john brockman could very easily have detected player of the year because of that kind of criteria. win the conference championship and your best player, pac-10 player of the year. >> steve: jamelle mcmillan comes back in. taylor rohde as well. stanford see a full-court pressure from asu. and they're calling a foul on trent lockett. the clock will not move. that's the fifth foul on what it. he suffered a tough game, not scoring and connecting five fouls. >> marques: it's good to see johnny dawkins and the way his coaching staff went at his team the last couple minutes.

you see the difference in these guys. you see the toughness level. just had its on edge. they were arguing with each other. he's kind of laid back. stanford got to each other, make sure you block out, i tired of running. they were getting into each other in practice and matt at each other. he told us at that time that he wanted his team, the 9 sets to you ball into, heading into the tournament. >> steve: he has a marvelous coaching staff.

they call it on abbott? >> marques: that's a break forrizona state,ecause tha off

be tough. the eye test is objective. how is the team looking back to committee members sequestered back in the hotel in indianapolis looking at this game. they cannot be too impressed with the arizona state sun devils. >> steve: three are in the semis. ucla against california, stanford awaiting the winner of our next game, oregon state and washington. but marques, we go back to d. one nutter, defense. stanford dead last in almost every defensive category this year. they played out of their minds against a fine asu team. >> marques: coaching staff nice job on the scouting reports. they did a great job, stanford's defense on tie abbott. just been the aggressor, forcing turnovers and getting arizona state back on their heels. terrific job by johnny dawkins. >> steve: stanford, rebecca, shot 55% and their defense forced 17 arizona state turnovers, the most by a son double-team against a pac-10

slow this year. >> marques: incredible upset tonight. some anything's were going right for your ball club, what impressed you the most? >> i thought we did a great job all night of defending them. i thought our guys did a really good job of executing our game plan and i'm just really proud of them. >> over the years you've been a part of so many impressive wins. what is the most rewarding part of an upset? >> it's always exciting to see our kids face this. this is the time when dreams are made. our kids believe in each other. we believe that and it is exciting to see them compete at this level. >> jeremy green out there tonight, talk about his offensive game. >> i thought jeremy was terrific. he was very patient. he found the open areas of the zone. he was able to make some shots and i was proud of his efforts. >> other guy who was certainly terrific tonight, landry fields, the defining run of this game came in the second half. you guys went on a 24-5 run. talk about the confidence to put this team away so early. >> we wanted to come out in the

second half with poise and continue to defend like we did in the first half and i think we can now with a win like that perfect. >> defensively arizona state through you a bunch of different looks but it seemed like you were able to find your shot. >> it's all about policeand making the right reads and taking what defenders give you. >> the other thing about the offensive performance was the balance. talk about the guys on your team. >> they were phenomenal. jeremy green stepped up and did his thing and a manual did very well also. i'm proud of my guys. we've got to take into next game. >> congratulations. stanford with the upset win. they did it all with hustle tonight. it's going to be exciting tomorrow. >> thank you very much. a huge upset as number seven stanford knocks off number two seed arizona state, 70-61. when we come back, michael eaves, miles simon, don maclean, marques johnson. everybody talking about the pac-10 and everything else

that's going around college basketball on this big co ball tent d. l be bac anared... eal . ever why e fr es b ♪ los only w tofor . milos really w lay usse mily wo pl for urt. miloly w lay me. how' jap? we ky yo amer fly an ting. nofrom chicago.

timnthi get a grip on the new kfc boneless filet. our meatiest piece of boneless chicken ever... with a side, biscuit, and drink for just 5 bucks. unthink. and taste the unbucket side of kfc.

welcome back to los angeles. triple header coverage today, three games in the books, one more game to go. we're going to talk about the game coming up and also some big topics around the ncaa. we've got our esteemed panel here. we're glad you guys joined us up here. three of the best players to play in the conference, marques johnson, the wooden award winner in 1927, won a championship in 1975, don maclean the all-time leading scorer in the history of the pac-10 and also ucla alum and of course miles simon won a championship with arizona in 1997, was player of the year in that tournament. most of you thought that arizona state kind of needed to win

tonight to solidify a spot in the ncaa tournament next week what they didn't play as if that's what they were trying to do. >> they didn't play with that sense of urgency until too late in the second half and by that time stanford was locked in defensively. i loved johnny dawkins katelin. he went in the war room, put his best athletes on the floor doing a lot of switching against the offensive the sun devils. >> sometimes in this situation you assume stanford is not playing for the thing that. you know you have to win one so you show up and let's get this one. stanford's like no, not that easy tonight. >> i thought it was a tight performance to say the least from arizona state and talking about johnny dawkins, i was at practice last week and he was really into these guys. he can be kind of laid back as a coach at times but he made them run for not blocking out. they were getting into it with each other and i think that translated into some toughness on the floor tonight. >> it will be interesting to see what the selection committee thinks of arizona state's full body of work, to see if they get

to the ncaa tournament next week. let's go to the big east. one of the potential number one seeds for the tournament, syracuse taken on georgetown and this was an upset special. craig monroe there. so many talented players on both teams but the hoyas made the plays down the stretch. austin freeman. they win 91-84. the orange men lose their starting center in this game as well. not sure what his condition will be for next week. here's a look at the four teams that we thought going into this weekend would be the four number one seeds next week. kansas, kentucky, duke. will they still be number one seeds next week? >> the funniest part is on that board that we just saw, do was on the outside looking in. now it's syracuse because they lost. i think all of those number one teams were head and shoulders above everyone else and i think it will stay that way. >> ohio state win the big ten tournament because of devin turner, they have a chance to maybe slide in as a number one but i like those four.

>> ohio state, you have to remember evan turner sat out half the games they lost and he's the national player of the year. if you threw him in and they win the big ten i think they will be primed to get that number one. >> do they leapfrogged to coarser accused him that i think they've leapfrogged to. >> what is duke doesn't get to the championship game in the ncaa tournament? >> if ohio state wins their tournament especially and they very well could, with the great play of the been turner. >> is due quinn's their tournament that what? >> the bigis a little bit stronger and ohio state played a tougher schedule. >> one topic circulating around college basketballth prsi -tel ex f65ms expansion is not new to the ncaa tournament. back in 1980 it went to 48 teams, '83 at four or, '84 a added an additional team. '85 it went to 64 and on 9 years ago they added one more team to

the ncaa tournament, the so-called play in game. the ncaa tournament doesn't like you playing that but what do you think of expanding this field to 96 teams for the regular-season champion as well as the conference tournament champion? >> it's okay. i'm a purist. i'd love to see it stay the way it is but it's not going to happen. there's too much money on the table. the ncaa have an out clause to negotiate the tournament. they've got a bunch of bidders that what the contract and the money funds other non revenue drawings court. i think it will happen. >> money wins out but as a sports fan and a college basketball fan, to me the ncaa tournament and the final four is the one sporting events to me that doesn't need any fixing. you can find little things with the world series. the ncaa tournament has been great for a long time. >> i agree that it's going to happen but it doesn't need to. the ncaa tournament is great where it's at. look at the college bowl system.

we have to many bowl games as it is right now. you don't watch all those games. 96 teams or 128 or however many they add will be a lot of meaningless games in the ncaa tournaments. >> watered-down. >> it's hard to win six games in a row and you expanded a the more? we might even more upsets which brings all the madness to march. great, tremendous round table discussion about all things pac-10 and ncaa tournament. we're coming back at staples center, the pacific life pac-10 quarterfinal round continues. can washington play its way into can washington play its way into mñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñmñ

6' 8, 8 1/2, can do it all. i mean when i say do it all and do it gracefully. i mean with the greatest of ease. >> benji will, so his game and personality were -- wilson, his game and personality were electric, a future star in the nba until one morning when everything changed. get an inside glimpse at the man the nfl mayors have chosen to lead them in -- players have chosen to lead them in the fighnewtive rgaient. 'll uce emar ith. >> t our stin >> and a truy th abou inws tvie'

hello and welcome to this edition of net impact. we've seen nfl commissioner roger goodell and nfl players association executive director demaris smith exchanging pleasantries through the media and have even been in front of congress as the two sides attempt a collective bargaining agreement and as they do so the atmosphere will get more tense. we know goodell he's within on the job three years now but who is this man that the players have chosen to be their voice in this turbulent time? here's comcast sportsnet's mid- atlantic's jill sorenson. >> for our last practice we could play head coach.

>> yea! >> we do head coach. >> reporter: this is fun for demaris smith the executive director of the nfl players association by day and a coach for his 10-year-old son allen and his baseball team in silver vince, maryland, by night. >> tag -- in silver springs, maryland, by night. >> tag him! >> reporter: the intensity and passion you see here is smith's day job as union smith named the successor to the late and edge legendary gene upshaw in march, the man everyone calls dean has not slowed down. >> i've been on the job six months. i've probably been on the road three and a half, four months solid. >> reporter: he was seen as an outsider to get the job with former players as the front runners. his background as a trial lawyer was far from the experience of an nfl player. >> i definitely think that's a positive that he was an outsider, you know, guy coming in, he doesn't have all the connections or, you know, any

preconceived notions of what was happening before and, you know, can he come in and kind of look at things clearly. >> i'm very confident. i'm confident, that you know, he can get things done, whatever that may be. he's presented himself in such a way and i think he's broken it down to the players in such a way that we can understand it. >> reporter: as much as he's an outsider d. is a d.c. insider having grown up a stone's throw from fedex field. >> you come out of the room in d.c. and get smacked and then you're injected with burgundy and gold. >> reporter: on his resume counsel to then deputy attorney general eric holder and he also served on president obama's transition team. >> business worldwide in some way, shape or form always touches washington. it's one heck of a sports town. so yeah, those are things that are inextricably tied to who i am. does it affect what i do? probably. but hopefully affects it for the better. >> reporter: with the possible lockout on the horizon demorris

smith has made it a priority to visit each team to help them understand the process. >> this was in one of the file drawers in our office and it slowly but surely i'm going through every drawer, every cabinet. >> reporter: why? >> a great deal of our history on what we have done internally to be a stronger union is there. the one thing i'm blessed about is gene was an incredible note taker. here on the back he'd clearly written out in longhand a speech that i don't know whether he gave or was going to give, but the most interesting part at the bottom is you see it in quotes, the nfl has always been willing to take a short loss for a long term gain. >> reporter: in the midst of negotiations or perhaps because of them d. and the union have made national headlines on a regular basis. >> as executive director, my no. 1 priority is to protect those who play and have played this game. to me it is probably a little

bit of a combination of half negotiation, half trial lawyer. i mean both of those things are things that are in my dna for some way, shape or form. i think about my grandfather in the pulpit. there's probably a little bit of that, too. as a result, i'm really not afraid of my question. i want guys to be actively involved. truth be told, i probably lean on them in a very hard way, but this is their union. it's not my union. it's their union. >> reporter: always in the line of fire demorris smith is used to the heat. >> i thought that was a -- 17-year-old ben benji wilson was a rising star, a young basketball phenom with a definite nba future. in fact, in 1984 wilson was the no. 1 ranked high school basketball player in the nation. he'd been described as a magic johnson with a jump shot and kevin garnett with a better handle of the ball and a better

perimeter game. luke stuckmeyer of comcast sportsnet chicago shows us wilson's wizardry on the court. >> reporter: chicago may be a football town and baseball crazy in summertime, but at its core in the city basketball is a way of life. we're not just talking about the m.j. glory days. we're talking about the kids who built their games here like isiah thomas on the west side and more recently dwayne wade and derrick rose on the south side, but 25 years ago somebody else owned these courts in chicago, a skinny silky kid with a smile named benji. >> and center for the wolverines a junior, 6' 7, no. 25 ben wilson. >> if you haven't seen him, you're in for a treat, 20 a game. >> i would go and i want to be successful and i do what it takes to be successful and that is when i go home i study and

do my work and go to class. >> kind of corny stuff. >> well, it works. >> reporter: everything seemed to work for benjamin wilson, but especially basketball. >> wilson two. >> reporter: born and raised on the city's south side, he was the middle of five brothers and it wasn't long before that orange rock was the fiber of his life. >> looked like bruce lee with two basketballs. he approached the basketball hoops. just unbelievable what he could do with that ball three fingers pawning the ball like this. >> reporter: and with ben and his ball around the wilson's neighbors were always up early. >> the neighbors used to be furious about being woke up in the morning because he was always dribbling the basketball and one of the next-door neighbors mr. robertson said benji was the alarm clock to

get him up and go to work in the morning. >> reporter: by 16 wilson could still play like a point guard but now he soared like an eagle with his new 7' 3 wingspan. >> bankston drops it down to wilson for a turnaround. >> we used to imitate ben when he shoots his jump shot. it was like he'll shoot it and then put his wrist back like this and run down the court but everybody used to emulate him in high school. that's how big he was in high school. >> reporter: and everybody wanted to be around him. benji's game and personality drew in friends and admirers from all over including the nba. >> ben wilson steps in, scores. >> 6' 8, 8 1/2, can do it all. i mean when i say do it all and do it gracefully. i mean with the greatest of ease. i mean and it looks so pretty

when he was doing it. i mean it was smooth. it was silky. it was just you had to -- he had that camera that captured that moment. i mean he was that type of player. >> wilson slide down the lane. >> reporter: as a junior he was a starter on a lineup full of seniors. benji was third team all state and the wolverines went 30-1 for the 2a state title. that put simeon on the map. >> i think he helped push simeon into a more global nationwide type school, basketball power. i remember our senior year, you know, we thought we were world beaters, we could go anywhere and play anybody any time. >> reporter: after winning the state championship in the spring of 1984 ben kept improving stunning scouts at

the nike all american camp. he left as the first kid from illinois to ever be ranked as a no. 1 player in the entire country. >> he was clearly, clearly benjamin wilson was the no. 1 player in the country. no one came close. >> reporter: ahead how benji wilson's life changed in less than a second. >> ben's thumb was rising and then at midday. >> reporter: a horrific crime on these streets in chicago is remembered 25 years later.

benji wilson's future seemed secure. just a few years in college before fame and wealth would schuler follow in the nba -- would surely follow in the nba, but it wasn't meant to be. instead there was a tragic turn of events and now 25 years later benji wilson has never been forgotten. let's get back to his story. >> reporter: ben wilson had it all, sizzling basketball skills and an electric personality, but on november 20th, 1984, it was a gray cold fall day a on the like this one and on vinsenz avenue right in front of simeon high school the day was about to get even darker.

>> the old guys, they've served their times and lived their lives, when the sun is eclipsed or the sun is rising it's so different. ben's sun was rising moving towards midday and then it became midnight at midday. >> reporter: at 12:37 on november 20th ben wilson was walking with his girl friend and mother of his 10-week-old son brandon. they were a block from the school. he liked to gather at a small store around lunchtime but benji bumped into two freshmen from calumet high school on the sidewalk. they pulled out a .22 caliber handgun and shot him twice, one bullet piercing his aorta and the other tearing a hole in his liver. >> to this day i still don't know the story. i've never tried to seek out the story because the only person that could tell is

it and while the chaos continued at simeon benji's brothers were miles away with a sibling connection that still haunts them. >> i was in library class and i heard somebody say i got shot. i got shot. i was in library class and i was like i'm going crazy, but then i thought about cain and abel when cain slew his brother and the most high said where's your brother? i heard his blood cry from the earth. right there something let me know that he got shot. >> and as a matter of fact, i had a dream two nights in a row

before he died, somebody or something tried to tell me, had a dream that night benji was dead. next day i had a dream benji was dead. at that moment i heard my brother's voice say i got shoot just like i said to you there, came to me like. so this was something there and i was like what the hell's going on here? my mama always say you want the most high to talk to you, you got to be in a quiet place and i was in the library class at the time my brother was shot and i heard him. when i found out, i went be serk. >> ery as a

we seen ben on the floor by himself. that's what brothers do. >> they weren't supposed to. i don't like to talk about that but they had to see him. >> they was telling us that he's in stable condition and kenny allen pulled the sheet back and we saw him. we had to see him and we knew

he was gone. >> reporter: early the next morning the day his senior season was supposed to start ben wilson was pronounced dead at the age of just 17. even president ronald reagan called the family to offer h is dead. >> involved in extraordinary young man. >> he was gunned down. >> it's not how long you live. but how well you live. >> then i seen my brother in that casket. oh, tried to wake him up like

man, you ain't dead. get up, man. get up. get up. you ain't dead. get up. then seeing those two guys who did it. >> did you know ben wilson? did you know him? >> reporter: after the shooting cousins billy moore and omar dixon were taken into custody charged with murder and attempted robbery. moore was later sentenced to 40 years for pulling the trigger and dixon 30 years as his accomplice. on the day that benji died his simeon teammates decided to play their first game of the season without no. 25. earlier in the day students sobbed at simeon simply overwhelmed with grief, but benji's mother stood tall in the gymnasium.

>> so today i speak in love of all of you who keep benji's memory and dignity and be strength v and strength and love alive -- strength and love alive. >> reporter: the wake was held on the gymnasium floor and 8,000 people came to see benji lying in his no. 25 jersey. the line stretched blocks outside of the school, mourners waited seven hours. >> i still have dreams about him like, you know, he came back and he was able to play again, but just dreams. >> sometimes i sit down and, you know, when i'm going through things, you know, i speak, you know, just like i would to my grandparents, you know.

hey, benji, how you doing, that type of thing. i just can't forget about him. this is very emotional. >> reporter: still an emotional story 25 years later. there are some updates to this story. at the time of his murder benji wilson left behind a 10-week- old son named brandon. well, brandon would go on to become a talented high school prep basketball player himself. even played some college basketball at the university of

maryland eastern shore but he would leave after his sophomore season according to a school official and as for the two young men convicted of this horrific crime, william moore is still in federal prison for wilson's murder and omar dixon would tack on additional charms when he was arrested for aggravate -- charges when he was arrested for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon in a separate attempted murder case. let's move on. next summer south africa will play host to the 2010fifa world cup but it was back in 1995 when they hosted another world cup that changed the country, a game of rugby that united 42 million south africans. now clint eastwood's new movie in vic us brings this amazing true -- invictus brings this amazing true story to life and sat down with matt damon

is yuntr >>rep on ma ond sporth r tochan wor >> l s ouiny. rep onat inciple that the movie invictus was born. obviously you're a big sports fan yourself. what did sports do you think has the ability to unite people like the way we saw in this movie? >> weah, spare iqued ted o ite and ela was actually quoted as saying that. i guess there's something about getting, you know, 60,000 people in a space together g fotly sa thou kople ss tcoun caion peooss the . s cawas

thiste >> b me paect faces the daunting task of a vide h afogetin the wake of apartheid. what struck you about this story that made you so interested in wanting to do it? >> that it was true. i couldn't believe it when i read it and i called clint and i said i can't believe this stor ther fog. as hand th wad thint make no e. leas pre, it kes teso me repomandout th of e taint

rugby team. francois is a pretty big guy. how did you get ady ay >>gr world obly t th beey so >> sou i am i am

is ioing ny fson. d ent m, dre youults are ally at ri for 1n1 rus et's togethe and the getour ccin you'tectelf lp p e spf th flu vs ar e tst tiv evenflu. getactsu.go

take a look at san francisco 49er eric heitmann and you'd never know that off the field he's a pianoman. here's comcast sportsnet's bay area's brody brazil to show us. >> reporter: this is the side of eric heitmann people know, an offensive lineman for the 49ers since 2002. and this is the side most would never expect, at 6' 3 315 pounds he's got the frame of a

football behemoth with the hands of a beethoven. >> my mom made me take lessons about 10, 11 years growing up as a kid. right around when i started playing football, football became more of a focus for me and piano you put on the back burner a little bit. it was always secondary for me, always a hobby but something that i always kept up. >> reporter: inside his home today heitmann employs both a piano and keyboard setup inner it connected with the apple program garage band. it is here where the stanford graduate composes his best work in the form of cinematic sound scapes. >> my style is more of a movie classical theme sounding stuff i guess i would characterize it. >> so dramatic it plays well essentially. it's dynamic. >> yeah. i'd like to think that. you guys can be the judge. >> reporter: while football is the profession and composition is the passion, it's the music that gives eric an escape from life when he needs it.

and, they sort of dissented so the rules can get to it. they are not going to have a huge debate. it takes 48 hours after it leaves the budget committee to go to the rules committee so that could come as early as wednesday if the budget committee actually meets and they are going to take out how to get this on the senate floor. i was told today -- not on the house floor. i was told today that they briefed the democratic members and gentle ways, was the way it was described, as to how to get the bill on the house floor that will satisfy member concerns. ..

>> our mission is to make it more open and connect it. and we do that providing people a free tool whereby they can share information with anyone anywhere at anytime. >> with more than 400 users on time it's the fastest-growing website in the world good-faith of public policy or ten

sparapani saturday on "the communicators" on c-span. >> obama his facial a thick idea is the government in deciding salaries. this is a life lesson in progress right now. the >> sunday, michelle easton, founder and president of the claire booth policy institute underwear to promote conservative women in leadership roles sunday night on c-span q&a. >> the senate commerce committee are different perspectives on the supposed merger between comcast network nbc and cable provider comcast. a merger currently under review by the fcc and department of justice dared witnesses include comcast chairman brian roberts, a representative of the consumer federation of america and the head of the regional cable and internet company. this is two hours.

>> welcome, mr. brendan roberts, chairman and d.o. contest corporation. mr. john wells, president of the writers guild of america appeared dr. mark cooper, director of research at consumer federation of america. ms. colleen abdoulah, president, ceo of a while internet cable and phone spirit and mr. christopher, you professor at the university of costa mesa. can we have order please and everybody take their seats rapidly? senator dorgan -- senator dorgan is going to chair. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> why don't begin. first of all, apologies to you. we have the essay builds that this committee has written on the floor of the senate and so a number of a further in other hearings as well. but i appreciate very much the witnesses on this panel coming to the committee to testify. but mr. brian roberts ceo of comcast. i believe senator rockefeller has identified although some channel so i will not do that again. why don't we begin, mr. roberts, which you and has been the case

with all witnesses, the full statement will be made a part of the permanent record and would ask the witnesses to summarize. mr. roberts, you may proceed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's a privilege to come here today and talk about contest planned joint venture with ge re: nbc universal. my father, ralph, seated behind me started comcast as we heard almost of a century ago with a single small cable system in mississippi and together we been able to build the national cable broadband adjudications company employing nearly 100,000 people. so i'm proposing tucuman with nbc universal we are taking the next step in our improbable journey. i'm proud of what we've been able to accomplish and especially that my father is here today with me to share this important moment in comcast history. let me briefly summarize the transaction under our agreement, contessa become the 51% owner and manager of nbc universal. ge will still own 39% pure will

create a new venture that combines nbc's broadcast tv cable programming and theme park businesses with comcast limited video programming channels. the transaction puts two great american media and entertainment companies under one roof. it will help to deliver more diverse or granted millions of households and will also help to accelerate a truly amazing digital future for consumers. together comcast and nbc u. can help deliver multiplatform video experiments people want. in combination will be a more creative and innovative company and our successful stimulator competitors to be more innovative, too. for this joint venture will be good for consumers, innovation and competition. to leave no doubt about the benefits of the new nbcu, we have made a series of public commitments in writing detailing how will bring more local programming, more children's programming and more diverse programming on more platforms.

we've also made commitments to reassure our competitors that we will compete fairly in the marketplace. let me offer two quick examples tippers commode volunteer to the key components of the program access rules apply to our retransmission negotiations for nbc station, even though those wells have never played to retransmission consent negotiations. second, we went independent programmers with quality and diverse content to know we are committed to help them reach and 90 and so we have committed to two independently owned cable channel source system every year beginning in 2011. bringing nbcu and tomas together is primarily a vertical conversation. there is no significant overlap between the assets of the two companies. a vertical combination generally opposes your competitive concerns that also means no massive layoffs, no kosher facilities, nothing to produce hundreds of millions of dollars of quote synergies come and go. this is why some on wall street did not fall in love with the

still right away, but it is also why we believe washington can because we will grow these great american businesses over the long-term and make them more successful, not cut them. congress has recognized the benefits of vertical integration before and adopted rules in 1992 to address potential risks. at that time there was almost no competition to cable. more than half the channels were owned by cable companies, so congress created the program access and program carriage rules to ensure that a company with a cable content and can contribution would not treat them unfairly. those wells have worked in the past and will work in the future we are willing to discuss with the sec having the program access rules bind us even if they were to be overturned by the courts. in the past decade comcast is going to washington twice to seek merger approvals. when we acquired approval system from at&t and adelphia. each time mixing of consumers would benefit and in each case i believe we have delivered.

we spend billions of dollars upgrading cable systems to make them state-of-the-art. we created on demand, which our customers have used 14 billion times and from a standing start four years ago, we now give millions of americans their first real phone choice. we have created thousands of jobs and promoted diversity in our workforce. once again, we described how consumers will benefit want to assure you that we will deliver. mr. chairman, we are asking for the opportunity to make one of the great icons of american american broadcasting adjudications one of the broadcast family. we promise to be reliable stewards for the national treasures of nbc and nbc news. it's a breathtaking and humbling moment in our history and we hope to have your support. thank you very much. >> mr. roberts, thank you very much. mr. wells, nice to see you. you may proceed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i am honored to write the 8000

guild writer and in media markets including online video content. ritually all of the entertainment programming in a significant portion of news programming seen on television and in film is written by members of the members of our affiliate writers east. wgaw has had primetime television of the last few decades including er, the west wing and most recently southland. the nbcu is concerned that the impact of verdure of universal in comcast, what that merger will have long wgaw consumers. over the past several decades our industry has consolidated for literally dozens of independent entrepreneurs and suppliers to a handful of large media conglomerates controlling content from certain finish. this has not been good for writers to face fewer creative and economic opportunities, which in turn have a negative

effect on job creation for the timber workers. the industry may point to the growth of chair and distribution platforms as evidence of opportunities for independent and diverse content but the reality is a handful of multinational companies control what viewers watch. wgaw announces a primetime series in the fall 2009 network schedule found that only 16% in series were independently produced across the five broadcast networks, with only 10% independently produced on nbc. twenty years ago under the financial indication regulation, 70% of primetime lineup was independently produced, including deedee howser, the wonder years, cosby show, whose the bus in designing women. with the cable networks, comcast will have the incentive to bump them out of the most popular tears and favorites newly acquired networks. this new media superpower could unaffected by consumers the ability to select channels through its marketing practices of bundling channel position

into replacement. this proposed media consolidation also promises to have a significant impact on these programming. diverse news sources are necessary for democracy in this merger will concentrate a significant amount of local, national and online news programming within one company. we do not want to see repeated clear channel's consolidation of the radio industry while comcast has plans to preserve nbc local news we filled as they promised they could easily be forgotten pursuit of corporate cost efficiencies. the greatest danger posed by the merger of the comcast-nbc universal is its effect on the developing online internet video market. we believe comcast may be tempted to use its position as the largest provider residential internet services to favorites newly acquired content and content provided by other companies and reciprocal or monetary arrangements. that could come in the form of faster access to comcast-nbc universal content or other content that favors to the detriment of all other content now available to consumers over their comcast applied

connections. comcast accented a service and can assure the proposed mercer raises concerns of comcast levels that dominates to control online video internet. they could stifle information between strengthening the market control of video distribution by requiring consumer to have because the cables script and direct online video. most recently, we've seen nbc embracing this practice, research in online access to some 2010 winter olympics on tend only to authenticated subscribers of the cato, satellite or iptv service. comcast controlled nbc universal will only enhance these anticompetitive efforts. the wgaw has serious concerns about comcast and nbc universal serving as a gatekeeper for video content online. in addition, contest would acquire 30% of hulu. it will reduce doing of this

content to potentially residual payments for writers and other talent. the internet is quickly becoming a town square to ensure free and open internet we must require companies like comcast remain mutual and the delivery of content without my service, both in the speed of delivery and the cost of delivery. as the creators of intellectual property we believe in copyright protection in the pearcy must be addressed through a combination of new technology and a strong force that regime all the while maintaining a free internet. comcast is also said it would like to sit control to establish a model that can be replicated with other third parties. we are concerned below-market transfer prices may be standards for pricing content for third-party suppliers or it's imperative that the interest of content creators in the entertainment industry workers not be sacrificed to enhance the value of comcast distribution business. the guild shares the concern about labor practices that have been voiced by the committee geisha and workers of america, the cwa's experience of comcast has demonstrated a poor track

record of worker rights. if approved merger of comcast and nbc universal merger will lead to distribution of programming. they believed then and may be legally binding and enforceable by regulators and the online space regulators must require the cbs comcast universal not discriminate in favor of oregon's content on the internet by agreeing to network neutrality rules. this merged entity should also not be allowed to use its market power to deny distribution of programming on alternative services on the internet that might compete with comcast-nbc universal various platforms or video-on-demand services geared to promote independent programming they must go beyond their offer to independent channel such love little impact in the market of 500 plus channels and be required to allocate 25% of primetime programming on its broadcast and cable networks to independent programming. the definition of independent programming should be crafted in such a way to ensue artists on such program or not to just

provide for programming space for other media conglomerates. local news and public broadcasting must be preserved to a church community voices and diversity of opinions and comcast should be required to promote these programs to subsidize advertising campaigns. thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. i look or to answer many questions. >> mr. wells, thank you very much. dr. cooper. , mr. chairman. and comcast claims there is little for antitrust authorities to look at in this merger, they must think we're still living in the don't worry be happy do-nothing era of antitrust and regulation. thankfully for consumers as you heard this morning, that is not the case. officials who understand the concentration of vertical integration can be back or consumers and the economy, who understand the public interest principles are good for citizens in civic discourse are in office and not a moment too soon. this merger is uniquely anticompetitive across a number

of market and threatens to restrict consumer choice, reduce programming diversity and raise prices. comcast and nbc competes head to head and local distribution of video content in a dozen of the nation's most important local market. they compete head-to-head in the production of video content for multichannel distribution, with comcast sports and news wind up against nbc's sports and news. they compete head-to-head in the distribution of video content online. indeed, nbc is a major partner in hulu, and internet distribution platform. in addition to the outright elimination of direct competition between nbc and comcast in these markets, the marriage of the nations largest table operator with one of the nation's premier video content producers will give comcast an immense amount of vertical leverage to use against competing video programmers and

distributors. favoring its own content with access to cable systems that reach one quarter of the mvp demarcates into nine competing programmers access to those cable systems places a heavy thumb on the scale of competition in the video content market. withholding must have content from competing distributors undermines competition for eyeballs and distribution. the merged entity will also have the incentive and ability to raise prices for large program tour de force for programming on cable systems, which raises consumers priciest of the bundles get larger and more expensive. the history of the cable industry since the passage of the 1996 act has been the history of consolidation and higher prices here to where all familiar with the fact that cable prices have increased twice as fast as the rate of inflation since 1996 and plus widely known, but equally important to note that the

operating cash flow of the cable operators, that is the cash left over after operating spend, including programming has increased four times at the rate of inflation. that is where comcast get $6.5 billion in cash during the worst recession since the great depression to buy a 51% interest in nbc. many of these processes have operated to push up prices over the last decade. this merger will reinforce all of those prophecies, perpetuating the problem of rising prices. but the most ominous threat to future competition is to the internet as a platform for video competition. comcast has already signaled its intention to expand the ugly cable business model to the internet by proposing a market division scheme with the second-largest cable operator, time warner. comcast is seeking to prevent

local sports teams from making their content available online. nbc moved its olympic coverage behind an internet pay wall. the marriage of the nation's largest broadband service provider with one of the nation's premier video content producers heightens the danger of these threats dramatically. geography is not supposed to matter on the internet. there are no franchises, no rights-of-way, no regulatory impediments to entry. few if any construction course. there is no reason that cable don't compete head-to-head on the internet for every eyeball, no matter where they're located. but their proposal called tv everywhere would actually restrict that competition tying the internet product to their physical cable products. in the lexicon of the cable industry, tv everywhere means competition nowhere. federal authorities must do more than just preserve the industry structure which is riddled with

anti-competitive and institutions and practices. they should seize this moment to implement the long overdue reform. of course the six areas that i mentioned in my testimony, local markets, affiliate relations, cable program access, cable carriage, internet distribution and independent programming. if policymakers allow this merger to go forward without fundamental reform of the underlying industry structure, the prospects for a more competitive consumer friendly competition from a multichannel video marketplace will be developed a severe blow. thank you. >> dr. cooper, thank you very much. ms. abdoulah, you may proceed. >> i appreciate the opportunity to represent wow! in the small and medium-sized companies are members of the aca. wow! is a broadband competitor and five midwest markets when a million of our household compete directly with comcast in

michigan and illinois. we differentiate ourselves through our customer experience that we provide and customers appreciate having a choice. they recently recognized us as the number one cable internet and phone provider in last month's consumer report. they have recognized us with ten jd power awards. our customer centric approach really works. we know how to compete. we're not here to ask for favors from you or government assistance for special advantages. the prospect of having comcast nbcu which has been deemed by the senate as my staff will give them more market power and i believe that should concern you on behalf of consumers. we are going to pay substantially more for the programming based on weak just to be today at this merger is

approved without condition. and we will have no choice but to pass that onto consumers. then explain specifically why they will have more market power after the joke poster. comcast as you know is not just a large cable operator. it is also a significant owner of programming including ten must-have regional sports networks. and you can imagine how hard that would be to compete in the markets without local sports. then nbc has ten broadcast networks also must carry. nbc owns popular cable networks that we need to compete. comcast owned cable channels here you combine all that together, that is increased market power in post-merger, we will be negotiating with one consolidated entity with much greater leverage to extract higher prices in broader distribution of their programming. and i know this because it happens today. in a finding that the fcc,

suddenly other providers demonstrate when they have to negotiate with one company for two must have rock stations in their same market, their rates were 20% higher than in markets where suddenly negotiated on the station by station basis. our experience that while validates his experience. these kind of feet and higher. i am told that the doj find the proposed transaction is anticompetitive if prices are likely to go up by more than 5% after a deal closes. so here are the harms that result from the merger if it is not conditioned: operators like wow! are charged higher prices as a result consumers will pay more. comcast will use its increased market power to demand that operators like wow! carry additional networks, not watch or wanted a customers. mr. roberts was quoted a few weeks ago that services like comcast would enjoy the benefits

of nbcu scale. to me that means bundling, more tenable value networks with high-value networks and charging more. and for direct competitors to comcast, they will have every incentive to deny us both online content and advanced services. and in defense of my concerns, comcast is offered to abide or the existing rules. these concessions are meaningless since the program access rules failed to remedy abuses today and will continue to be meaningless if the merger is approved without conditions and reform. here are the problems that need to be addressed specifically: pogrom access rules provide no automatic right to carriage of the network while the cases pending and we all know the impact that has on customers. program access rules are ranked with loopholes that allow for discriminatory pricing.

there is no price transparency to allow the fcc to resolve program access dispute and finally the current arbitration process is limited only to must-have sports programming and broadcast stations and it is time-consuming and costly, so much so that it's beyond the means of an adc member -- aca member to utilize. so in closing, i believe companies like wow! are just the kind of competitors sought in the 92 and 96 packs are not here to suggest that the merger not be approved. however, i am here to say that the fcc and doj need to consider structural and behavioral relief, such as stronger more effective program access requirements. the goal has to be to prevent increased consumer pricing, preserve competition the most about that a positive precedent for future mergers of this type. thank you for having me. >> ms. abdoulah, thank you very

much. and finally professor yoo may proceed. >> thank you for inviting me to testify how consolidation will affect consumers. my written testimony has a complete analysis of the likely consumer impact the proposed merger and nbc universal has appeared rather than rigorous those arguments here i would like to use my time to emphasize to basic points. first, any antitrust analysis should begin with the principles embodied by the decisions of the supreme court, this congress, the antitrust regulatory agencies and the fcc. in the starting point for the merger analysis is typically the merger guidelines issued by the federal trade commission and the justice department. those merger guidelines will be analysis that a live that indicate the proposed merger is unlikely to harm tumors. the guidelines also indicate that the markets affected by these mergers are competitive enough to protect consumers against anticompetitive effects. on the issues of horizontal integration, the congress, the

courts, the fcc recognized the local broadcasting and local cable operators constantly do separate markets despite repeated attempts by the sec to enact measures to prohibit combining television stations and cable operators under the same corporate umbrella. those rules were invariably struck down by the courts is arbitrary, capricious and inconsistent with the statutory obligations established by this congress. the fcc is now abandoned all effort to reinstate these roles. burger conditions limiting this type of crossownership would constitute a form of back for regulation that would allow the fcc to impose restrictions to the merger process that it was unable to enact the regular administrative processes. on vertical integration, the decision of the supreme court of the merger guidelines established the proposed merger is unlikely to have an any edge of comfortable effect. they must also take into account of the industry has undergone massive vertical disintegration

over the past 15 years. during that time, the level of vertical integration of plummeted from a high of 56% in 1994 to a mere 6% in 2009. this effect becomes even start of one focuses only on the most highly rated television networks. the level of vertical concentration among the most highly rated networks have plummeted from a high of 93% in 1994 to about 13% today. moreover, the past two years have witnessed the dissolution of the two largest pergola integrated companies operate in the sector. in 2008, new scorecard the owner of the fox television properties reversed his 2004 acquisition of direct tv. in 2009 time warner, the owner such leading networks as tbs, cnn and hbo spun off its cable operations into a separate company. in short while vertical integration may arguably have once been a concern if important the past is hard to make this case and the current current business environment.

anyone suggesting that this merger will harm consumers must bear the heavy burden. they must justify deviating the supreme court, the fcc and the antitrust authorities. they must refute the facts indicating that the merger is so unlikely to hurt consumers and should be approved under the merger conference without further analysis. we but in these have more than just opinion and conjecture it refers we can analysis and empirical research. this makes the fcc commitment to fact make decision-making particularly welcome. the second point i would like to make is to focus attention on the recognize problems associated with using merger refused to make regulatory policy. traditional regulatory processes adjust problem on an industrywide basis, guarantee public participation and are subject to meaningful judicial review. each of these leads to better decisions and ensures the policies are enacted remain fair. the same cannot be said of

conditions imposed during the merger of you process. opportunities for public participation are more limited and even when public participation is permitted, they tend to focus narrowly on the issues raised by a particular transaction instead of how those issues affect the entire industry. they are also less likely to your clear statements of regulatory policy embarrassment from scrutiny by the court. traditions on this merger also the necessarily address 26% of the industry and would be the vast majority of the problem unaddressed. the use of company specific adjudications to address issues that confront the entire industry threatens to skew the competitive landscape and raises serious issues of fairness here this is not to say that the card current regime is perfect. they identify what they see as flaws in the process and suggest possible reform. the best course of action when confronted with regulations that are imperfect is not to jury

reggae company specific conclusions simply because a particular party happens to be seeking clearance of a merger. the best practices to blow up in a gentle proceeding to adjust any problems that may exist on industrywide basis. as the chairman genachowski said that they have exercised ongoing oversight in this manner and stands ready to do so in the future. in the wake of an era where the fcc was criticized by this congress for failing to follow good administrative progress to maintaining that process would be particularly important. any other solution turning merger review into back to regulation that hurts consumers create bad policy to misuse the competitive landscape and undermines democratic values as well as the integrity of agency processes. thank you. >> professor yoo, thank you for a match for her testimony. he indicated to senator rockefeller that i would come back in chair the second panel and i would just make a very brief statement and then ask some questions.

you know, i have a history on the committee with senator lott, the dorgon lot provision. i think we were the first to exercise the legislative dede some years ago. i have long been concerned about concentration, particularly in media ownership. i don't think big is always bad or small is always good, but they do think that we should always ask the question, what does this mean to the free market? the free market works best when of robust competitors competing on price and product differential and so the question is, i would have some disagreement perhaps with you, professor yoo. they would combine for them to describe why this combination is not going to harm the free market system on the white is not going to be distracted by

the public interest and why it is going to competition. i think he also agrees that he has this burden. there are a smaller number of interest in the country, i agree with mr. wells and nearly determine what we see and hear and read each day. and so, we should be cognizant of that and understand what that means in terms the future concentrations. i mean, i have been here long enough so i have watched mr. levin and mr. case said at that table and tell us what an unbelievably wonderful idea it was to combine time warner and aol. i'm telling you, they were missionaries on a mission, absolutely, completely convinced it was not only the public interest but in their interest. of course it turns out history answers a lot of those questions and it certainly answer that in

a very aggressive way. i'm concerned about a number of things on which i will ask questions about and i think what we want to do here is to learn. we have differences of opinion on this panel. the independent programming issue is one that i'm interested in. i'm concerned that we have seen such diminished activity and opportunity for independent programming. and i fear more of that. and i think mr. wells with the questions that the very important question. i'm going to ask mr. roberts about that. mr. yoo, i didn't quite understand whether you're saying that the fcc should decide yes or no, but in many of them should not establish conditions because you don't think conditions are appropriate. either this merger should be approved or not approved but you don't support conditions on the merger. that's kind of a fair piece from where i think most of us would expect. i mean, we seemed conditions attached to a fair number of mergers recently.

i'm -- let me begin to ask a few questions and then i'll turn to my colleagues and will all have ample opportunity to ask these questions. tonight mr. roberts, you've heard a lot of testimony about what you're trying to do in the testimony about ms. abdoulah's idea of how she is a smaller enterprise associates to deal with you and you have more leverage. mr. wells contention that he's worried about what she might do to hulu. give us your response and your retort to some of the questions that i've been asked about what kind of leverage comcast will happen what it will mean for the can number. >> thank you very much. i'd start with your point about aol time warner, the people who sit where i'm sitting they have aspirations of the time. there were many fears about the transaction. and as history pointed out proved they made a mistake and they paid a very heavy price.

and so, many have said, as we heard in professor yoo would be testimony time warner and timetable has separated new score and everywhere tv which were approved for us a similar process but not right for them as he wanted to operate their businesses. so i think i begin by saying it's on a short day and and you start with, what is your principal motivation? my opinion, principal motivation is an opportunity that time when our economy has really suffered in the past year or so to make a bad that we're going to see a rebound and that this is a good time to bet on america, on advertising coming back and done consumers wanting more and more content. and one of my answers to mr. wells is you don't buy the fourth-place network that was once, from my formative for years, the number one network

and want to do harm but rather you want to invest in growth and restore it to its creator. another reasons general electric has chosen us to partner with in the 5149 transaction is they think that we will be more focused and more committed to wanting to see innovation and investment. we know, and as was discussed with the internet, we know consumers are looking for more ways to get content on more devices. this is a very nice nascent market. video over the internet is our friend and we're trying to find ways to accelerate that. we just invested billions of dollars to a trade disputes of our internet capacity so that we can find more applications be then 3-d, high definition or whatever the great engineers will turn up next. so i have no desire to want to see that trend cannot continue to flourish. it's what is a big part of the growth of our company is

broadband, to miss abdoulah's points, i think that our company has been in the content business. she had believed cares a lot about programming. some of the things that are being talked about as was pointed out are industrywide here it is the fcc process for program access has frustrated her in the past, i'm not aware of any specific complaint that she's ever had about comcast up until this transaction. but to me, the chairman has an opportunity to do reform at the fcc, to look at that on an industrywide basis. and i certainly would welcome a process like that but i don't see how it relates specifically to this merger. >> is nearly exhausted my time. >> i'm sorry. >> what we want to do in on plenty of time what someone else has left. let me ask this question of you, mr. roberts. i think if this merger is approved, i've no idea if you

will be or not, i have no idea whether it is worry. i have no idea whether it -- if it is subsequently approved will be approved with the conditions. but i believe comcast is actually come even now, contesting the sec's authority with respect to certain condition, the net neutrality issues and so on. so tell me, is that a conflict for you? >> you know, that's been raised and i appreciate the chance to address it and i'll do it as quickly as i can so i don't want to exhaust time. i think it's an important issue. for certain parts of some of the rules that have been in place to get reviewed, the past fcc had some policies that i think have been overturned against the industry and about our company and specifics. so i think there's always that issue. what we try to address fears remain voluntary commitments

that we would be prepared to sign and a binding way with the fcc such as the program access, such as free broadcast television remain free over the air, some of the issues that have been discussed in a prior panel and have been discussed previously. so no, i don't believe in the event that they were overturned by the courts, we're prepared to have them applied to bus and have a conversation with the fcc. >> i have other questions for you and i will ask a question if you when we're all done. why should this merger be allowed? but don't answer that at the moment. let me say this, i'm going to ask all of these questions because he bought with lot of really interesting issues that i think the purpose of this hearing is to explore those issues. and you bought contributed an insubstantial, but i want to have my colleagues have the opportunity to ask questions and then i will continue when they're completed here at

senator johanns in order of arrival. last [laughter] >> thank you come on mr. chairman. i appreciate your being here. y'all have a different view of the world. so let me if i make zero win on some things. mr. wells, at various points in your testimony you reference a free internet. and i was just curious what you meant by free internet. >> i think content creators have concerns about on the new site and on the entertainment side and also just on the community discussion side at the companies that are providing internet service to many, many of the homes in this country, have continued to provide that in an equal access passion to everyone who wants to come through that pipe, through the internet

connection. we have concerns or be preferential financial treatment given to this ease with which or the costs which are associated with the difference between bundled content that might come from an nbc universal comcast company together and also arrangements for others or be required to get the higher speed delivery. and so, think we have real concerns attribute equal access in the speeds in the cost of everything that's available through internet connections. >> okay, let me take a little deeper on that. i don't use the internet a lot. and maybe turn on the computer, look at how the dozen sites because i'm interested in what they're doing there. and if i spend an hour a day on the internet would be a lot for me. they're other people that spend most of their day. they download things in there watching movies or whatever they're doing. should the two of us pay the same for that?

>> i think everyone who wants to access material should be paying the same amount. she didn't so much exactly what the consumer is paying although i think that is concerned. i think the concern is will the speed with which examined through the internet because video use in the banned the video uses, which is why there's a substantial amount of investment that's been made requires larger and larger amounts. the problem with that is the people who do not have the financial resources to give that preferential treatment, but may be very important to the way which we perceive everything that we get, particularly as i think we seen a domination and local news, whether that be to the diminishment of local newspapers, whether that be through the diminishment of what will actually be happening with local news for a lot of local news in local broadcasting that everyone have the same opportunity. and for entertainment as well. so i'm just saying that we are concerned that if it takes when

you sit down at a computer do you get a very quick connection in an immediate feed unless they nbc news. but if you want to see huffington post or another blog or something that goes much more slowly there's concerns about that. there are questions when we get into pirated materials to when we talk about pirated copy. >> mr. roberts, let me turn to you if i may. you know, your family kind of a kind of epitomizes what has happened in this arena. i'm old enough where i remember the first tbb locked into the living room and i grew up in northern iowa on a farm and are methodist changing channels with somebody had to be out back and we headed to buy for wrapped around a pole with an antenna at the top and then somebody inside would scream too far, too far and then you would constantly adjust so you could get that picture.

[laughter] and so, if you wanted to change channels in the dead of winter, somebody had to run around to the back of the house while somebody was screaming inside. [laughter] now i look at what we have done and, you know, i have to tell you there's probably a cost difference between the old system that i grew up with in today's system, but it's remarkable. what we have the ability to access. so i want to ask you if the criticism that you've gotten here, how do you anticipate you will serve your consumers better and what about this merger will allow you to take at the next step in the next step and the next step that pretty soon not be able to sit in front of my tv and have a conversation in a video link with my grandchildren back in nebraska.

tell me how you think you can benefit consumers because there are some here that are raising criticism about what you are heading out to do. >> senator, i appreciate really putting it in historical concept -- in historical context, as they think about what my father's generation of entrepreneurs and what i've been doing for 30 years now is all about. people forget where we were and we decorated the viewer viewing experience, not always for the better, you know, some of the point is made that all content is perfect. but in reality, it's breathtaking what's changed in such a short period of time and what will happen in the next five or ten years i dare try to guess. what i'm trying to do for our company and our customers is to witness transaction and try to associate ourselves with some of the most creative and talented

creators, try to find a technological way to create successful businesses for them and to make it great for the consumer, to take this technology like wideband, which is beyond broad and so that you could do the video conference in high definition back home. there is no insurance that this is right or this will work but that is what american business is all about. and what i would suggest to some of the criticism is sure there's always a potential you might do this, you might do that. first of all, it's a very visible industry. as many regulatory oversight agencies and we have a track record of wanting to innovate here at our goal was not to get into cable to slow down innovation, but to speed it up to speed it up. and as i look at this merger i see this those once-in-a-lifetime opportunity really to try to associate ourselves with the best content

that isn't doing quite as well, that's inside a company like general elect, that today has other business opportunities unique to them all over the world and for us to still be a defining opportunity. >> my time is expired. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator johanns, your description makes us look like fossils. in my generation we had one that was that the car dealership. since it was 125 miles from the nearest television station guilty when we got were what was called kids and sometimes we did a skit signal from somebody broadcasting professional wrestling,. and the whole time would come down to watch wrestling from west virginia for about a minute and then snow. [laughter] senator isakson and then senator beckett -- senator klobuchar, i'm sorry. >> you can see why they're so productive in north dakota, not much time to mess around.

it's good to see all of you again. i'm the only senator on the judiciary and commerce that we all remember that judiciary hearing well. so i thought i would start with you, mr. roberts. i actually did some follow-up questions after that. and i raised this issue at the judiciary. about the price of expanded cable that's gone up faster than the rate of inflation since 19954 times faster and customers are concerned in these tough economic times with their cable bills. and what assurances can you give that this merger won't result in higher fees for customers? >> well, first of all, we are always focused on that question. i don't think anything specific to this merger would incentivize us or cause us to want to raise cable rates. we're in a competitive business. we compete against ms. abdoulah,

directv, we commit, verizon, universe, it's a very different business than it's ever been and it's very much. for instance in washington d.c., we start as low as $15. we have 14 different levels of service aired where much are competitively sensitive. we're trying to improve our programming with on demand as other technologies. and, you know, i still believe digital video for what comcast by the way is not the highest cost. i think there are many providers who will charge more than we do, but as a group, the number of hours and what you get versus just going to a movie continues to be starkly different for the number of hours of $300 a month at the average cable household watches in excess of that. it turns out to be coming to know, 33 cents per viewing our purses, you know, $15 to go to a

movie for an hour for a family of four. so i think we still have a great value. as for the industry has been help low, reinvest, create jobs, but i'm very mindful of the question. i do believe this noble cause that to change henry scott to stay focused as competitive. >> i know there'll be a lot of lawyers looking at this deal, but i thought i'd run through a few things that i've heard that people have raised with me about concerns. one is that nbc and its affiliates have succeeded by giving its programming to as many viewers as possible in providing this content. we talked about the judiciary for free over the air or over the internet where comcast uses 33% in hulu.com to restrict the programming available on hulu.com or nbc.com. >> i never even personally met with the hulu team. we own about 31% in on controlling stake. we have no intention of changing nbc's relationship with hulu.

in hulu itself, from what i've read in the trade press is going through business model reviews and how to fund it and what its future will be. we are not at that table and i look forward to learning more about that business once we do get together. >> to expect comcast to buy from the internet and what about charging subscriber fees? >> i don't -- comcast does not want to block nbc content or frankly block any content on the internet. and i don't think that, as i said, i think that my vision is the content creator in different windows of different business models. sometimes they want to be pay-per-view like going to a movie in a movie theater. sometimes he do that in your home.

sometimes it's ad supported only. sometimes it's part of a subscription. and who knows what other business models will come out in the future. for my comcast perspective, my vision is to technologically try to create platforms and make sure that the content is not targeted. you know, that it's authentic. and finding a way to let companies create their own business models that work for their businesses into the future. >> okay, now ms. abdoulah has raised this issue about small and midsize cable operators may find objected to how they are compelled to negotiating program in contrast of the cable channels and was broadcast affiliates. concern about the beverage that you would have over both your video distributor competitors, your program distributor competitors who do not going to ask for the two, but what protections do you think should be in place to make sure comcast does not unfair advantage over competitors in these

negotiations? >> i believe that we patentability to resolve because we want her carriage and we want other competitors carriage. we don't want to spend with limited in a $30 billion overall transaction value potentially or some number that's very substantial to not want when you're about 24% of the distribution marketplace, you're hoping to get the other 76. it's much in our interest is a business matter, as was referenced in the other testimonies is antitrust laws tiered in addition to that, there's the competitive reality that we all have a very vibrant channel if you're not distributed. and then you go to the program access rules, which we talked about. and if there is not complete with those, there's hopefully an opportunity for the sec to make it more attractive across all companies, not just their own. it also seen other video distributors, direct tv and time

warner cable be separated from their parent companies who were making content because they didn't see that there was some advantage. so i think there's a lot of answers to the question. >> i'm running out of time here. ms. abdoulah, what protection and dr. cooper do you think would most help with this issue. u.s.a. great question about will prices go up for comcast questioners customers. i can say it might not for comcast, but i can tell you but will for us because of the reasons that i mentioned in my testimony. the issues for us are cost in carriage as a competitor and all people who compete for the product. in essence, your wholesalers also your retailer until you're buying products now from these large companies and the remedies that you talk about, where do we go if we can't get what we need,

if we can't represent our consumers want appropriately, what protections would help? and if the outside world, like it them are biased and reformed. >> and they are set to expire in 2012. >> incentive for going to approve the merger before that, that's inadequate to say that we will adhere to the current access rules, which are not ineffectual. if they don't help protect us in the way so we need to from a competitive standpoint, then that is meaningless. so we would ask that the conditions be placed especially very specifically if we have an issue, give us the right to make sure that that network stays on the air while were negotiating. but a time sensitive on it, which i noticed comcast put and their conditions they'd be willing to buy the time on it. but also make sure that the network has to stay on during the time of the negotiation otherwise busy with happens to

customers. we witnessed death at the academy awards recently. >> i wanted to know what happened at the academy awards. i'll ask her later. and dr. cooper, i'm way over my time, so could you and i talk about this later. i'll call you anything but the answer in writing for me. thank you tiered >> thank you rematch, mr. chairman. just some very quick questions if i can. mr. roberts, so i can understand the magnitude. what is the comcast gross revenues? >> about 35 billion. >> with nbc what will it be? >> about 50 billion. >> what is your customer base for comcast? >> about 24 million. >> about 24 million? >> cable customers. >> let me walk through a couple questions that i have in the purchase an agreement, argue partially financed equity and debt? is it a combo?

>> individually to ensure, 51% comcast, 49% ge. we're contributing some asset that some of our cable programming assets as well as somewhere around six or 5 billion in cash. we will borrow that cash plus cash that we already have on hand. for the eddie -- >> that gives me -- >> that remains 45% of the equity. >> in your investments, can i ask right of return that you're expecting? >> what we hope -- we haven't made a public forecast. what we said is we're hopeful to have positive and hopefully double-digit rate of return. [inaudible]

>> high single, low double digits, maybe mid-double. depends are a few of the company and the strength of -- >> i have your faith that there were in the right move and that's why you're moving down this path. >> we're also long-term. it depends what time. you asked that question. >> know what that information, are you anticipating that to be a recovered to rear weight structure both for residential and commercial rates? >> no. ..

is an advertising supported is less of a large part of the answer is, the second part of the answer would he improve quality so you get higher ratings than you get higher efforts icing not just from a healthier market that from a better product. and the same goes for the cable and then there are subscription fees that the cable channels have and traditionally nbc has been a fairly priced, widely distributed group of cable

channels like usa, sci-fi and we are counting on is this as usual in that regard. >> let ask you and again i am new at this process and i'm watching my time very quickly. the question has come up on union contracts or there has been some commentary that comcast hasn't been as fair and i am not saying those are my words. i'm just repeating what i have heard or coheres the question. how many of your employees currently are under union come tracked for comcast? under any union. >> we have two basic business is. in the cable business it is around two to 3%. that is pretty normal for cable operators and you will find that that is not an outlier in my opinion. in our programming business it is north of 10 to 14%, in that range, which is maybe in some of our business a little bit higher and their regional sports

business, which is also i think inside the norms. we have tried to stress that we intend to honor and support all of the agreements with the guilds and the traits that nbc has. it is a very different business than cable distribution. but, we are very proud of what we have dealt tilted comcast with 100,000 employees and the company people would like to work or and i'm very proud of that are crispy let you get to one more question and then i will submit the rest for the record because of time. do you agree that conditions could eventually be placed on you during the agreement and why not just not wait for congress because if you wait for congress, i may be dead and gone by then it why don't i just work it out, inserted into the conditions in move forward? >> in some ways i think we have suggested that or go on day one, we had knowledge that there were

certain areas, how we compete, how we invest, how we feel about localism, how we feel about free over the air broadcast and we how we feel about some of the union issues. one of the commitments that we clarified that clarify that we are also prepared to talk to the fcc and make ayn thing is if the court case were to overturn some of the access conditions. they tend to be focused on exclusivity and some of the issues like sunday ticket or nascar. >> i apologize. my time is up but i have questions. i will submit them to you for the record but again on the conditions because they think the chairman asked an interesting question and that is ... m., i guess here's the question. would you allow to make sure the conditions are and whatever agreement without the argument that congress will do it later?

in other words forget about what we are going to do because if you wait you will never get this transaction. >> the conditions we have suggested and that we are prepared to further talk about and further clarify would not premise themselves on congress. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> senator lamy of. >> thank you mr. chairman. professor yoo, i want to start with you. my memory with antitrust analysis and it has been some time is one of the first thing to things to talk about is the market. what is the relevant market here in determining whether or not this transaction meets antitrust standards? >> i really appreciate focusing on this. we have heard any dire warnings, little discussion of law, little discussion of arc at. there basically to market here. what is the market for distributing to video programming oak leaf taper leaky done by a local cable operator. the second is the market for cable television networks either

broadcast television or sir cable networks. in general these are considered to be completely independent markets. there is a well-established framework by the lines for analyzing these mergers in setting up concentration levels. the guidelines set up benchmarks for each kind of merger. there is some mergers which require strict scrutiny or cause some get light look and some are rude without any extensive analysis at all. what is most interesting is when you define these markets properly i actually looking at the facts, his falls under the category of things that should be up roof without significant scrutiny at all and in fact if you look at actual enforcement all of the over the decade of about 1996 to 2005 spanning both democratic and republican, no antitrust authority has authority has ever challenged a merger at the low levels of concentration that are here. i think there are real concerns

that people have and mergers do change and is disrupted to a lot of people and is going to create different patterns but that is the inevitable part of business. >> when you say the relatively low concentrations i'm looking at your testimony on pages 14 and 15 and you say nbc universal has a 90% share of the market revenue which makes them fourth place among cable programmers. the combined company, fourth place among able programming company so even in these markets and it is also my sense that these markets are changing so quick he or go the way that we get programming, we are getting it on our black area. we are getting it on the internet. who knows what the next thing is going to be. even within the marketplace as it is now which one state that it led if it did it seems like it is a low concentration. >> absolutely and if you look at the trends they are becoming less concentrated with every passing year. you also bring up the fact that

traditional models are changing. in a very real sense there is an archaic aspect to this discussion. if you look at the where kids access, in those markets the party started are emerging have .7% of the market in .3% of the market and the merger will yield an entity of 1%. we have heard much discussion about hulu which is an independently financed, even hulu as important as it is in peoples minds is 4% of the market. we are talking about a very different landscape in a very small player. >> mr. roberts one thing that occurred to me is as you acquire more content i guess one concern with the whether or not you would seek to charge more for other contents to come on your cable network or whether you would give preferential pricing to your content so it would be anti-competitive or cocaine you address those concerns? >> i have heard the concern and it has been referenced a little

bit. first of all, if that was such an achievable objective why did news corp. get out of direct cb? why did time warner spin off time warner cable? it is such a competitive that i don't think that is really the motivation nor do i really think that is charlie buyable and there are very visible industries and program access opportunities that the fcc. what is our motivation is to try to make these channels better, more relevant, invest in them be more focused on them than their current situation and then we think they are good as this is as you describe, as the next generation wants the platforms. i don't know how more we can stated that that is really what our goal is. and i think if we do that we will have a successful deal here. >> can you speak to what is

going to happen to employees of nbc and specifically as you may expect being a senator from florida i am concerned about nbc universal. the theme park operation i guess is headquartered there. i expect you are going to commit there is no plans to move that to philadelphia? [laughter] >> people would love to be in this know we have had in philadelphia all winter long here in washington. yes, we are excited about other businesses that we haven't talked about at all today, nbc, universal and what have you in the investment being made at the theme parks with harry potter. that is in my opinion under talked about, is ge decided to sell and in all likelihood it was going to sell to somebody and most of those somebodies that i can see would have had duplicative businesses and it would have been real job reductions. the fact is comcast does not own a theme park, does not own a

broadcast, does not own a film studio and doesn't own any of those cable type news channel so we don't anticipate any reductions and movements and all the disruption to people's lives at this really sensitive time in the economy and i think that is maybe not the sole determinative factor but a reality that ge had chosen to sell and if they sold to somebody with more synergy, wall street would have liked it if washington perhaps would have had more dislike. >> if you would like to move the general headquarters down to florida, we welcome matt workout thank you mr. chairman. >> speaking of headquarters, i think members of the panel might be interested to know that this giant of comcast actually had its beginnings in my hometown of tupelo, mississippi, and mr. roberts father, mr. ralph

roberts is sitting right behind him. if you would wave to the audience mr. roberts. he is not from mississippi but he chose the city of tupelo, mississippi in 1963 to start american cable systems, which is now grown into comcast. so, i did not want this opportunity to pass without giving members that little history lesson and give our welcome on behalf of the committee to mr. ralph roberts. but, to our witness, mr. roberts, what do i tell my folks regardless of where they get their tv? give me some specific benefits they are going to get. you are going to get this, they said this and it is going to be better if this gets approved.

>> first of all thank you on behalf of the roberts family. somehow he gets the nice part and i get the tough questions. [laughter] but i have been living with that for a longtime. >> by the way, it occurs to me you want to hasten the fact that you do love philadelphia. >> we are very proud of the mississippi heritage in the company. let me you know, right off the bat i tell you i hope we are going to make better program; we are going to invest in in localism because we are a local company and whether that is the tv station or the cable station there has been a trend to cut tax on local public affairs programming and local news programming. take something like on demand. we today have 14 billion on demand shows that have been downloaded on comcast systems in the last several years. war than anybody else. that is more than i tunes across

the whole united states or cookies or half an hour approximately on average. that is a technology we sort of helped invent. the number one criticism i get when i talk to customers about on demand is why can't i get war movies, why can't i get more tv shows on demand? we have 4000 movies and the library and 3000 television shows in a library. i certainly hope we can hasten consumers access to older content, and newer content on more distribution platforms than ever before. we are at heart a technology company embracing change and i think both from the product itself side and from the availability and changing nature of how consumers at different ages want to consume, that is one of the goals i have so more on-demand content and i hope your content available over the internet not as has been described, less content available. that is not in keeping with what

our goal would e4 this transaction. >> okay, so more local programming, quicker access to on-demand and more content over the internet. mr. cooper or miss up to low would either of you care to challenge that? >> the economic interest of comcast is to maximize its profit, and-- [inaudible] >> i don't object to that at all but the antitrust laws believe the competition is the way to accomplish that so here's an example of the map that mr. roberts might discover. if he can't deny ms. abdoulah access to must-have regional sports brogue remi and thereby shrunk his audience, that undermine her right to steal eyeballs from him he makes more money that way. he uses his control of access to this programming to reduce

competition in the local, distribution of video programming and increases his prophet. and all the numbers you have heard about market shares, what number was left out. and now most every market where he, he said this is a local business, of the multichannel video market he has at least a 50% arco chair and many of its markets he might have a 60% market share. that his local market power. that is what number you didn't hear it all in this ocean of numbers. that is the heart of his market power. that gives him the ability. that is how he exercises market power there. you can take that arithmetic and apply it across the board. with mvc programming he is guaranteeing them access to 24% of the market is now he owns them. >> miss up to love wants to jump in and we only have a minute left and then maybe mr. roberts.

>> again i am not here to debate whether to be approved or not. if and when it is approved it is critical it has reasons for the reason he has said. you can talk national numbers all you want. the concern comes down to the local level. >> you are reiterating your previous points. what i was asking you is, are my folks going to get more local shows, more access to on-demand and more content over the internet? >> well if they are from comcast, yes. if they are from a competitor it depends. whether they can negotiate for that content at a reasonable price, at reasonable carriage and reasonable terms and conditions and it they are not reasonable right now the program access rules did not give us clear opportunity to resolve them. >> can we ask mr. roberts to

give a 32nd rebuttal? >> i will do it in less than 30 i hope that they think you are talking around all the issues and i think it will be a euro review and the fcc said maybe they can do rig from. nbc content today is not object to those rogue ram access rules so by combining with comcast there is now an additional governmental review process for any dealings on that content with ms. abdul dump money. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> senator mccaskill. >> thank you mr. chairman. dr. cooper discussed the obvious and i do want to make sure mr. roberts, there is absolutely nothing wrong with your company making a profit. obviously, your job is to make sure that your company makes a profit. you would be in big trouble if your company wasn't make any profit, so i think i want to ask the basic question. i am i'm assuming you want this urge or because you think you

can make more money. >> i stated earlier, we hope to have a positive return on our investment but as the chairman pointed out at the start, not all mergers have worked for shareholders. others like aol time warner or like directv and news corp.. >> you keep using those as examples but i'm assuming you are going forward because you believe you are going to make one a. >> i hope we have made a good deal. >> you have figured out that something that time warner and aol did not dig your out i am assuming and you are telling your shareholders you figured something out because you plan on making money on on the steel. >> we hope the economy perhaps the biggest difference is the moment in time. aol was at the peak of the internet double and we are hoping we are at the bottom. >> let's assume that you do make money on it. let's assume that this is a risk

which is part of the fabric of american business and it is a great heart of the fabric of american business. it is one we should all relish, all of the us in this room are risk-takers or we would not he here. there are a lot of risks in coming to this place to sell let's assume your risk is a solid risk and you make great on you. i'm assuming you have no problem with other consolidations that are similar to the select me away hypothetical question. if in fact a year from now or two years from now i assume you would have no problem with time warner buying abc? >> if i might, which time warner? >> time warner cable, your competitor. >> i would have no problem. >> you would have no problem with dish lying cbs? >> again, the only comment i would make him i don't think so but in the world of hypothetical what are the facts at that time? i just want to caveat that

answer but i think in the market the way i see it is more competitive than ever and there are new technologies, and we compete and i think are the most part what you are positing, i don't think that is where the market will go by the way because the trend has been the other way. >> that you are bucking that trend and you wouldn't be doing it if you didn't think there was a moneymaking opportunity their. >> the ceos of big companies you reference have come out and say they don't like the way the trends are going. >> ceos have a way of coming and going. i guess what i'm saying is we are going down the road with this merger and i want to make sure since you may be the first one down the road that you are personally fine with them saying, on everybody follow me, let's do the same thing. >> you know, if we are successful as i hope we aren't people want to follow that road under the right circumstances depending on what the tax are at the time one of the points i

would use the chance to make his i'm not sure that is what the trend will be if you asked my opinion but hypothetically i don't think we own any media voices in the market so different hypotheticals have different realities. we don't happen to own the news channel or broadcast network or a movie studio or a a theme park. >> okay. do you charge yourself a lower rate for your regional sports network and you charge other operators? >> we are in 10 different cities, hundreds of different agreements. we have our scale in some markets and some distributors so i don't know off the top of my head every deal and every rate. i think for the most part there is a transparent process. >> if you would give us that information i think that would be helpful to know. >> some of those agreements i will have our team follow-up the best they can given our

confidential à law tea agreements that we can try to summarize. >> i think it is important we get a handle on whether or not there is a price premium to others for what you want because they think it is a good indicator of what may come in the future. >> i would point out also that our regional sports business, the question specifically asked, are subject to a condition we had on a previous deal that anyone who is not happy can complain to the fcc and go through a process. >> that is good. finally, no there has been a lot of talk about program access rules and how they are going to be protected. here is my question about that are going this is pointed but that is kind of my job here. if you are relying on the program access rules to reassure people that there won't be problems associated with this, isn't it true that you are in court challenging those very

program access rules as we speak? >> let me say, i said earlier in the testimony of rent that previous to this transaction there was a challenge made i think it was cablevision that we join and on the exclusivity, or by merely the exclusivity provision because those rules were written 20 through years ago and the last 20 years things like sunday ticket, nascar are exclusively on our competitor directv, dish network has something like 50, 60 or 80 ethnic channels that are exclusive and so the question was should the rules apply to these new platforms that are now way more successful than they were 20 years ago when they didn't exist or should the rules sunset but what we have volunteered is even if we were to win that case, we would want the program access rules to apply to us and we are prepared to talk to the fcc about how to do this as part of this review.

>> mr. chairman i think the committee should take a look at this program access rules and see if there something we could be helpful on and making sure they are tight enough and broad enough in this day and age because anything that is 20 years old in this current market obviously has huge issues with applicability today so i would suggest that is something we might want to take a look at. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you senator mccaskill. senator lautenberg are co. >> thank you mr. chairman and welcome all of you. while i was not in the room i was able to listen to your testimony. all of it very help. mr. roberts, and the promotion of the comcast-nbc merger, you have committed to expanding local broadcast news and public interest programming. now, new jersey, though its size

would make the fourth largest media market in the country, lacks its own market and the only commercial high-powered station in new jersey, w. max wor in my view has not adequately serve the people and new jersey. what ways might a combined comcast improve? give us some insurance that our local coverage of new jersey issues and events will be a major theme as a result of this are co. >> i am not sure i can completely change the broadcast business the way it is historically operated so i don't want to create a false answer. but, nbc universal is 30,000 creative people and folks and talent that comcast today does not have and what we have committed to is trying to a

great way to take some of the news talent, the newsgathering, rather than cut it out, try to find ways to have more airtime and more on demand for news, diverse programming, public affairs programming, so we will have more expertise in the company bent we do if we don't do this bill. we are certainly not going the other direction, and you know as you know we have many cable systems in new jersey that now will have the resources of an nbc in new york, and nbc in philadelphia eco. >> if we can be a little more specific. with the all all the cast multiple channels, might comcast and nbc seriously consider

devoting a broadcast channel exclusively to the issues and needs of the people in new jersey as opposed to us reaching the new york or philadelphia? >> i think it is something we should look at. there is an opportunity and a talent in the company looking to do more. we have been new jersey. i just don't know the answer as to why it hasn't happened before and i'm not an expert in broadcast business. >> you will have a significant increase in the number of channels that are available and i am asking for some degree of comfort to be offered in terms of making sure that new jersey, 9 million people, the ninth largest state in the country, can get the attention it rightfully deserves. >> what i would like to do senator is talk with nbc about that and if we can get back do

you and i would like to give a thoughtful response to that. it sounds like a market that is underserved and there is an opportunity there and i don't know why we wouldn't want to focus on it. >> i am saying nbc. >> i am kidding. >> fair enough. >> what about new technologies? i had a chance to meet with your colleagues and your senior partner yesterday and we discussed, unless the alliances have changed somewhat, but i thought ralph was the senior partner. >> without a doubt are co. >> but, talking about the advent of new technologies, the 3-d and so forth, what might this merger reduce by way of the acceleration to these new technologies and availability

would you think? what kind of pricing might the out there for people that use that technology and see the technology. >> i think we are seeing an extraordinary moment right now with technology and its change in its generational in part so if you look at the two largest movies in recent emory one of which involved time, avatar and now disney's latest movie with johnny depp, alice in wonderland , incredible response by the consumer in 3-d. how to bring that, and you are seeing in the next couple of weeks are right now several television set manufacturers announced they are going to put 3-d into tvs. that is a rate new consumer experience. i personally don't believe that people want to watch with glasses eight hours a day but for events and for special high, will produce content that can be

a hold of business. by the way i think if you speed up your internet connections you are going to be able to enjoy 3-d over the internet and we are going to do some demonstrations of that in the near future. so i think that is what gets me most energized about this transaction, and that is sort of what i was saying before certainly on a national basis and can you take this content and by the way exported around the world and comcast really transforms ourselves from a local company to a national and international company and uses our technology roots in our historical roots and tries to now say can we put our energy and aggressiveness around this bend frankly ge can our others in the space? i don't know that it will all be perfect, i'll be simple but that is really what it abates me. >> we had, as everyone is a bear-- aware, recent breakdown in negotiations between abc tv

and cablevision. suggests fcc rules governing and really professor i would like your comments on this, these efficient to protect consumers. might you suggest a change in the rules for retransmission consent and negotiation so that consumers are not constantly caught in the middle? this was a series of embarrassments. a feeling that too much muscle was being exercised over the viewing audience and it was disturbing. we jumped in and other people jumped in. i was not a soul lifeguard in this but a last-minute change was finally induced. is there something that you might suggest professor? >> can i think of something that will make it so every bargain goes to completion successfully when you have two people

bargaining over money, the answer is no. there are times in every bargain where one party has to walk away from the table. it happened when i bought my house. two sides have a different set of values there is going to be deadlock and if we have a system built around bargaining that is going to be the case. can we do things that will solve the process, start things earlier? absolutely. ms. abdoulah has raised a number of concerns. the point i'm trying to make him a i i am not opposed to merger. i think if they merger raises issues it is of course entirely appropriate to impose conditions. what i am concerned about is to take a general problem that affects the entire industry and to put that into a merger review process where the parties will do anything to the merger and agree to anything to the short shrift at issues. network neutrality has been mentioned. lots of filings, comments are due april 8. we have a proceeding that is

going to consider every aspect of that decision. we should allow the proceeding to run its course because that is how we make good policy subject to public participation. the danger is if we do it ad hoc we have a 21% art of the market and high-speed data, and to do it piecemeal through major review process hurts the process and leads to bad policy. >> one can agree with you as you review this. the question is, who is in charge? are the people who want, who use tv as a commodity in their lives today, you know that certainly mr. roberts, people consider that tv is rightfully an opportunity for them to learn and amuse, all of the things that occupy time. it is a wonderful addition to life for people who are in their later years, can see

communication from real-life situations. so, the question is, who was, as the determination to be made by and i am not suggesting that we impose rules there except i think there ought to be some sense of loyalty to the viewing public that says okay, if you have to suspend or continue your negotiations, that don't grab millions of people and say we are going to keep you from seeing something that is really important to them. >> that is a great question. the program is to provide the content have all the leverage. i can tell you a very quick story. we were negotiating with a programmer who had services who took off one of the services because it wasn't viewed. we never wanted it in the first place. two weeks later, not one customer complaint. i get a call saying if you don't put it back on their other

services which are highly viewed that would be taken off by midnight. it was not a comcast nbc programmer that i am talking about that it is that kind of leverage they have on operators who are representing consumers. that was not going to be good for our consumers and very little leverage because i could no one filed a complaint it even while i've while the complaint they can pull the network. >> mr. chairman, the record i assume will be kept open for a bit of time? thanks for your indulgence with my overrun here. >> let me ask some questions following which i will turn it over to senator cantwell. senator cantwell, welcome. there are so many questions here. [laughter] ms. abdoulah, the thing you have just described to this committee goes on all the time and we hear about it all the time.

providers are saying we have four channels here, and you have to take all four of them. despite the fact that you don't want all for and if you don't take two of them they are going to the most popular. that is leverage and there is a lot of for leverage and that is part of what we are taught in about here. how is leverage use, how will it affect what the consumer gets in the end? that is important. professor yoo i think you have at lease resolve one question. you seem to start in your testimony suggesting this is a slam dunk, yes or no, in your case yes and no conditions. i think you have just disabuse us of that. there is no problem with conditions, right? >> no problem with conditions. >> let me tell you the at&t bellsouth merger included net neutrality and in my judgment was very constructive and leaving us to more progress at the fcc on network neutrality.

that is not complete thanks to a whole lot of folks that are fighting it tooth and nail but i think things like network neutrality or internet freedom as i call it, are really important and i would not want to have a big interest decide to get married without a requirement. famously, mr. whitaker as you know, you and i talk about it every time i see you, look, these wires along to me and i don't want google or somebody using my wires free of charge so that set off of course exact what the basic issue is with respect to internet freedom and toll booths and so on. anyway having said all that, you have no problem with additions. i don't have a problem with conditions and if in the future this is approved there are going going to be conditions. >> if i may, i have no problem with implications with the merger. if people use the opportunity to

merge the review to expand beyond the scope of what is implicated by the merger i think i should go back to a normal record toward process. the net and it-- network neutrality-- if you read the order it says we as a commission did not decide the network neutrality is not required. but, they have voluntarily offered to do it and we accept their voluntary condition as the public interest and it has created a very strange policy posture for the fcc. >> perfect doublet policy in my judgment. district hooper. >> the interesting thing is that i actually agree with professor one yoo about how we have to do with the fundamental problems and mr. roberts has said these are fundamental problems in the industry. in my testimony i suggest a way to handle this is to insist that the fcc and the other relevant agencies do the industrywide rulemaking's first so that we have the basic structure of

protection that we need and then consider, because of this merger there are additional things. >> you understand some of the biggest interest in the country are doing all they can to prevent the fcc from moving. the fact that some of the biggest interest and all spend all of their time trying to prevent actually being taken industrywide. i understand your.. >> the dockets have been open for years. they simply need to be finished and then we will have a base for understanding how market power can be controlled. >> let me ask mr. wells come independent programming. as i said earlier it is very important and it is diminishing continues to be diminished so how do you see us making progress on this and i have by the way, who is doing the investigation? gao was doing an investigation of my requests on independent programming. it is a very important area and

i would like to understand between you and mr. roberts what is being proposed with respect to this merger can affect independent programming and the quantity of that? its? >> there are two separate issues. what is the broadcast network itself which is nbc which has been very restive and attempting internally to produce things for themselves and i think anything that could be done in what is now voluntary to compel some more independent roe grammy would be terrific. in the cable world, again, they control a great deal and there is very little that is actually going on. they are not actually doing for themselves and that is changed and has been difficult for an independent producer to bring things to the marketplace. >> why is that the case? why has it changed? >> it has change historically because the companies have used the leverage to either insisted

be produced for their own intraday or to insist that it each a coproduction in some fashion report goes on the air. there are numerous examples that could be brought forward. >> i am sorry. >> again this is why we have tremendous concerns about the net neutrality acts because we believe that independent producers may be able to get some sort of leg up on doing things independently if they have another distribution outlet which we might be able to use for people to produce independently assuming we wanted up having the exact same kinds of finance restrictions for getting that material particularly since it is going to require greater speed with which to put on the video content. >> for those of us that believe more independent programming is good for the country, what can we take from this, from the recent history and from your proposal to get larger through this inquisition? >> first of all i put it in the context that the previous

senator mentioned, let's go back in time when there were three tv channels and today there are hundreds. where i think comcast is helped to totally open up choice as have other cable companies, many independent producers exist in many have been selling their company choosing to consolidate into other providers. i think we should set rate some of these issues we are taught about. we have never really made broadcast television programming, so first of all whatever nbc has done, we hope we can do better in the future. i come with an open mind on how to do better. i don't know that i would support a government quota that would apply to us and say x percentage should be this and wimax percentage should be bad and it doesn't apply to anybody also there are other rules in the past that seemed to affect this area like fin-syn. if there should be an industry

review, i am sure nbc will have a point of view on that matter but i don't think this merger changes that trend or that existence if anything would come with an open mind not to just want to make history with our comcast networks. a substantial percentage of our programming is from independent. six out of every seven cable channels we carry after the merger will have no financial interest in and we have got to compete with other carriers in the programs they want to carry so whatever has been happening inside this industry we come and will try to see how to get the best programming possible in the future. >> you will inherit do this 10 nbc television stations. 17 telemundo stations. are there other communities in which you would have to nbc stations or two stations, and also in which you are the dominant cable provider and should it be an issue? >> there are markets where

telemundo and nbc are there and comcast is the cable operator. i don't believe so because one of the conditions we voluntarily started with was retransmission consent for those broadcast stations. that would have roe graham access applied where heretofore program access is never applied. >> applying a meaningless rule to something is still meaningless and it is an issue. in illinois we would negotiate for the regional sports network. we have the nbc network and we have telemundo, so now we are going to be instead of negotiating with two different providers now we negotiate with one for a lot of the suite of services and that is intense leverage that they are going to have on us today no increasing from today. >> i'm going to call on senator cantwell but let me say, i think

this is a significant issue. we should encourage carefully, understand the consequences, pro and con and then make judgments. if it is approved, it would have to be approved with conditions in my judgment but it is not for us. it is for the two regulatory agencies and i hope in this hearing they will take a good look at this and understand the consequences. i think there are two different use here. what level are you talking about competition, the local level or the national level and these are always difficult and interesting issues. as i said, might not ground on the issue of media concentration and the media ownership rules of the fcc have caused me to have a substantial amount of concern about concentration. on the other hand i don't think that every, in every

circumstance big is bad and small is beautiful. i think that our circumstances were concentration camp or by benefits to consumers but i will tell you something. i think concentration and leverage has to be tempered with rules and regulations and conditions. many examples where they were not tampered in such a way, turned out much different than is suggested. mr. roberts, mr. wells, dr. cooper and you ms. abdoulah have spent three hours with us and answered all the questions and i say to all five of view we appreciate that very much. i'm going to call on senator cantwell and now senator cantwell would you mind finishing the question and adjourning the hearing. i have to be on the capital. i thank all of the witnesses. >> a thank you research airmen and i want to recognize your long leadership in media consolidation issues and the importance of that, not that you

are going anywhere today or tomorrow but we certainly will miss that voice at the end of this congress and it has been a critically important one. wean the pacific northwest value it's a thank you for your leadership on that. i only have two questions. i am sure you have been through many questions from my colleagues here and i watched most of it. i wanted to ask mr. roberts, one of the reasons i think people think cable rates going up and it is between 95 and 2008 basic services increased 122% which is cpi only grew by 38% but one reason people think this growth in cable rates has been the cable network's willingness to bid for broadcast sports networking because they know the past that through to the subscriber base. a number of my washington state rot casters have expressed a

concern that, at the crux of this is this rabbit ear world of advertising eyeball content as a as in his model versus business model. and i am sure there are some people who wish we could go back because of the cost, and the networks are worried that they are going to be eventually priced out of major sporting events because their business model, an inability to pass those on to advertisers is going to be challenged so some people have even said that we in the not-too-distant future will be watching the super bowl on cable which means we will be paying for the super bowl as opposed to having an advertising model which would give access to a broader number of people. so, do you share those concerns and mr. cooper, ms. up to let you want to comment? the thank senator kat well. i think there is some industry trends that have been going on.

to give two examples that bcs is going from fox to espn in the future and monday nights of all went from abc to espn. so, i don't think this merger actually changes that attentional in a way. we would not need eying nbc's if we did not want to find ways to make nbc vibrant, valuable, great impact to some of the laureate did in the past and hopefully what it can do in the future. so i think some of the questions that it raised by that are retransmission consent, that we have been talking about today and i think our industry, and i think we can now perhaps play a constructive role, will be basically 80% of cable

operators, 20% of content company after the transaction so in a sense we are going to look at it from those sites and say are their creative and good for consumer solutions that we can propose that apply to the whole industry and not just to one company that addressed some of the things i think are very real that you have raised? >> dr. cooper do you worry we are going to have to pay for the super bowl in the future? >> the only reason the cable operators are able to pass through the outrageous cost of sports programming is because they force consumers to buy uncle's. they deny consumers per channel choice. one study done of those channels was -3/4 of the american people would not pay the price that they are being charged, so the answer is that the market power they have at the local level and the change incentives. nbc has an incentive to be on every tv set. once they are owned by comcast

they haven't different incentive because now they are on 24% of the nation's tv sets in so all of their incentives will change. their willingness to maximize profits will change. tv everywhere is a perfect example of time, cable fee to another service. that is another bundle. so that is the way we must address this. there is a real incentive here to extract from consumers what is called surplus right hiding those products together. they will have that incentive so it is a very real concern. >> from our perspective, the content providers have such leverage during negotiation not only do they make sure we take the product that they want us to take and not necessarily what consumers want or want to pay for but also how we carry it. or a long time i've wished our

programming agreements allowed us to tear the services appropriately so that when i got customer complaints i had a direct e-mail and a direct 800 number for customers to call me directly and they will say why do i have to pay for this sports programming? why is my know continuing to go up? i can't hear that as i am not allowed to. i would love to be able to offer services in a way that if we have words fanatics they can buy and pay extra for it at that that is not our program remits art currently structured. >> thank you. i have one more question i wanted to ask mr. roberts about customer service. when i think about vertical integration, i think this whole area we have, we have some barriers to entry here and we have challenges even for the consumers and switching from one competitor to another. it isn't as easy as people might

think to just do that and if we are only talking about two or three we are going to can -- may continue to see integration. to meet customer service is very important and when you think about the amount of honey that comcast has been able to make how much are they it to increase quality and customer service? >> let a first give a bad statistic which is we have lost 1.2 million cable customers in the last couple of years. so there is real competition that is hurting us and some of that is self-inflicted with mistakes we have made in customer service. i've made it a top irony for our company to improve customer service and the customer experience because when you call, it is how well the entire experience is defined. >> what grade would you give it? >> i think we have improved. i would say we were-- i don't know.

we have spent over $2 billion in the last two years more to improve the customer experience, and the number one thing that we are rolling out and we rolled out in the last six months all across the nation including your market is a guarantee to her customers, if we mess up we fess up and that is a huge change so if we are late for an appointment it is on us. we will pay your bill. we will give you premium service. we will pay $25. >> you will get free premium service? >> for that month or for a couple of months. markets have different specifics, but if we are late, here is $25, here is a guarantee if you don't like the product, give it back to us at the end of the first month. the kinds of things you have seen in other businesses that get back to their claims is now something we have across the entire company. we are upgrading the.

>> of the internet him up but we know it has to work and we know even if we have more choices than we have ever had before the tv-- we figure if it rakes, there is a crash in the cable goes out because they poll got not down, sometimes it is not our fault. u.s. a consumer don't want to hear that. can you text me a message that the cable is out and you want to know about the weird the link diagnostics into the system so we know maybe you are not home watching. all sorts of improvements along that nature because of competition, because it is the right thing to do, because it is good news in this and i think we have made robber is. i would say the grade is improving but it is still not perfect. >> i think it is probably far from perfect and i think really the issue from my respective is you are taking this revenue you are making off of this consumer base and trying to consolidated in a more vertical way which

will leave market with even less choice. it would be one thing if the consumer experience were continued great customer service so i encourage you to look at your business from that perspective. there are interesting things out there but saying to people you are going to come in a four-hour window and when they have to spend time to change to another service, so we are making this vertical integration makes it even more challenging. we want to see the consumer definitely has choice and definitely has competition but is also going to have a good experience and can easily move towards other competitors at that experience isn't delivered. >> if i might, to that point i really few and just to demonstrate a couple of points of progress, 2 million, 2.2 million fewer customer reported robinson the last

quarter or in the last month from a year prior. we went from 87 or 84% at one time. by putting the guarantee in place, our employees even if it doesn't completely compensate the consumer, to your., our system nobody wants to report that they spent that money so we have gotten to 95% one time from 87% just by putting that insurance in place and that guarantee in place. there is momentum in this direction. i take your constructive points that they should be the main focus of what we have to do well. we have just recruited a new head of comcast cable and this is the number one thing in recruiting that i suggested we focus on which is continually improving the customer experience. >> thank you. i want to tank while the panels. i know we are going to leave the record open for two weeks and if we can respond to any statements

in the record. thank you for your time. i'm sure this is going to be continued discussion. as you can see from my colleagues we are going to be following it closely, so the hearing is adjourned. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]